The Federalist Society

Optional Login

Have an account?

Sign in

Email

Password


Forgot password?

Proceed as Guest

Continue
Our website is currently undergoing updates, some links may no longer work and content may change. Please check back soon.

Auer v. Robbins

Facts of the Case

Provided by Oyez

Francis Bernard Auer, a St. Louis police sergeant, other St. Louis police sergeants, and a lieutenant sued the respondent police commissioners, including David A. Robbins, for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA). The commissioners argued that Auer and the other petitioners were "bona fide executive, administrative, or professional" employees exempted from overtime pay requirements by the FLSA. Under the Secretary of Labor's regulations, that exemption applies to employees paid a specified minimum amount on a "salary basis," which requires that the "compensation...not [be] subject to reduction because of variations in the quality or quantity of the work performed." Auer claimed that that they did not meet this test because, under the terms of the Police Department Manual, their compensation could theoretically be reduced for a variety of disciplinary infractions related to the "quality or quantity" of their work. The District Court and the Court of Appeals disagreed with Auer's claim. Both courts held that the salary basis test was satisfied.

Questions

  1. Must sergeants and lieutenants in the St. Louis Police Department be paid for working overtime pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938?

Conclusions

  1. No. In a unanimous decision, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court ruled that sergeants and lieutenants are exempt as salaried employees from the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. The justices rejected the argument that the possibility of suspension without pay moves the officers out of the exempt category.

A Most Unusual Brief From the Solicitor General: Threading the Needle on Auer Deference
News

A Most Unusual Brief From the Solicitor General: Threading the Needle on Auer Deference

Andrew R. Varcoe

Justice Department’s Response Brief in Kisor v. Wilkie Endeavors to Balance Competing Considerations – Criticizing a Major Modern Administrative-Law Doctrine, But Also Seeking to Prevent Its Overruling

Last week, the Solicitor General filed the United States’ eagerly anticipated response brief in Kisor...

Reconsidering the Legal Status of Agency Guidance
News

Reconsidering the Legal Status of Agency Guidance

Andrew R. Varcoe

In Holiday-Season Amendments to the Justice Department Manual, DOJ Continues the Trend of Downgrading the Status of Subregulatory Agency Guidance Documents

Late last year, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) took a quiet but significant step...

Deference to Agency Rule Interpretations: Problems of Expanding Constitutionally Questionable Authority in the Administrative State
Federalist Society Review

Deference to Agency Rule Interpretations: Problems of Expanding Constitutionally Questionable Authority in the Administrative State

Ronald A. Cass

Federalist Society Review, Volume 19

Note from the Editor: This article argues that, while judicial deference to agency decisions is...

Deference Doctrines and the Clean Water Act
FedSoc Forums

Deference Doctrines and the Clean Water Act

Jonathan H. Adler, Timothy Bishop

Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group, Administrative Law & Regulation Practice Group, and Regulatory Transparency Project

Recently, Justices of the Supreme Court have called the Court’s deference jurisprudence into significant question....

Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.: Judicial Overdeference Is Still a Massive Problem
Federalist Society Review

Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.: Judicial Overdeference Is Still a Massive Problem

Ilya Shapiro, David C. McDonald

Federalist Society Review, Volume 18

Note from the Editor: This article discusses Auer deference, a central issue in Gloucester County...